Category Archives: Philosophy

A Fourfold about Belief and Knowledge

February 11, 2023 Martin K. Jones 2 Comments

There was a fourfold making the rounds a while back about belief and knowledge of God or of gods. The terms Agnostic and Gnostic are about (the actuality or possibility of) having or not having knowledge, whereas Theist and Atheist are about having or not having belief in a deity or deities. So the following fourfold obtains:

Gnostic Atheist
Agnostic Atheist
Gnostic Theist
Agnostic Theist

Some criticized this framework, while others seemed to like it. YMMV.

Let’s see what ChatGPT says:

Gnostic Atheist: This term refers to someone who believes that God does not exist, and that this knowledge is certain. They have a definite and confident understanding about the non-existence of God.

Agnostic Atheist: This term refers to someone who doesn’t believe in God, but does not claim to have certainty about it. They may lack knowledge or certainty about the existence of God, but they do not believe in its existence.

Gnostic Theist: This term refers to someone who believes in the existence of God and has a definite and confident understanding about it. They have a strong conviction that God exists.

Agnostic Theist: This term refers to someone who believes in God but does not claim to have certainty or absolute knowledge about it. They have a belief in God, but acknowledge that it is not possible to have certain knowledge or proof of God’s existence.

In summary, “Gnostic” refers to knowledge or certainty, while “Agnostic” refers to lack of knowledge or certainty. The “Atheist” and “Theist” refer to the belief or non-belief in the existence of a higher power or deity, respectively.

Further Reading:

Other images:

https://www.google.com/search?q=gnostic+atheist+theist+agnostic&tbm=isch

For example:

Terrible graphs of agnostic atheism

I also see the following fourfold used (all nouns now):

Atheist
Theist
Gnostic
Agnostic

and even this eight-fold (a combination of the two):

Gnostic Atheist
Atheist
Agnostic Atheist
Agnostic
Agnostic Theist
Theist
Gnostic Theist
Gnostic

fourfolds, Philosophy

Four Philosophies, V3

February 4, 2023 Martin K. Jones 2 Comments

In ancient Greece, four types of philosophies centered around different individuals and groups who inhabited particular locations in Athens.

Porch (Stoa): Zeno of Citium
Garden: Epicurus
School (or Academy): Plato
Temple (or Lyceum): Aristotle

I’ve taken liberties with these place-names and probably should use the classical Greek or something.

I tried ChatGPT again (I just asked “Describe to me the ancient Greek philosophies of the porch, garden, school and temple.” I give up! 🙂 ):

The ancient Greek philosophical tradition was centered around different schools of thought, each with their own distinct teachings and practices.

The “Porch” (also known as the “Stoa”) was a philosophical school founded by Zeno of Citium, which emphasized the development of virtuous character through the practice of self-control and detachment. The Stoics believed in living in accordance with reason and nature, and sought to cultivate a calm and unruffled state of mind in the face of life’s challenges.

The “Garden” was a school founded by Epicurus, which taught that the path to happiness lay in seeking pleasure and avoiding pain. Epicureans believed that the universe was made up of atoms and that the soul was mortal, and they emphasized the importance of living a simple and moderate life.

The “School” (also known as the Academy) was founded by Plato, who was one of the most influential figures in Western philosophy. The Academy was a place of learning and discussion, and its teachings emphasized the importance of the Forms, or abstract ideal objects that exist in a realm beyond the physical world.

The “Temple” (also known as the Lyceum) was a philosophical school founded by Aristotle, who was a student of Plato. The Lyceum focused on empirical investigation and the study of nature, and Aristotle’s teachings emphasized the importance of finding the mean between extremes in all aspects of life.

Each of these schools offered different perspectives on the nature of reality, the good life, and the path to happiness, and their ideas continue to influence Western philosophy to this day.

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno_of_Citium

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle

Also:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyceum_%28classical%29

https://aeon.co/essays/forget-plato-aristotle-and-the-stoics-try-being-epicurean

What Are The Main Differences Between Epicureanism And Stoicism?

Epicureanism and Stoicism: Lessons, Similarities and Differences

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/stoicism/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoicism

https://www.thoughtco.com/happiness-epicurean-and-stoic-perspective-4070798

https://www.thoughtco.com/five-great-schools-ancient-greek-philosophy-2670495

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicureanism

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epicurus/

Stoicism

Finding Philosophy Among the Stones

http://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/philos-schools.html

[*12.164]

epistemology, fourfolds, Psychology

The SECI Model of Knowledge Dimensions

February 1, 2023 Martin K. Jones Leave a comment

The SECI Model of Knowledge Dimensions is a schema that attempts to explain how knowledge moves between tacit and explicit domains. The movement is a cycle or more properly a spiral in that knowledge builds upon itself.

Socialization (Tacit to Tacit)
Externalization (Tacit to Explicit)
Combination (Explicit to Explicit)
Internalization (Explicit to Tacit)

ChatGPT explains:

The SECI model, also known as the Ba model, is a knowledge management framework that describes how knowledge is created, shared, and transferred within an organization. The acronym SECI stands for Socialization, Externalization, Combination, and Internalization.

1. 1. Socialization: refers to the process of acquiring knowledge through social interaction, for example, through observing and imitating the behavior of others.
  2. Externalization: is the process of converting personal experiences, ideas, and insights into shared understanding and explicit knowledge. This stage involves expressing personal knowledge in a way that others can understand and utilize.
  3. Combination: refers to the process of combining and integrating different types of knowledge to create new knowledge. This can occur when individuals with different experiences and perspectives collaborate and share their knowledge.
  4. Internalization: is the process of incorporating new knowledge into personal knowledge structures, leading to changes in behavior, attitudes, and skills.

The SECI model is used to understand how knowledge can be managed effectively within an organization, and it provides a framework for designing knowledge management systems and processes.

Maybe I should let ChatGPT write my posts from now on! And here’s what ChatGPT says about this blog:

“Equivalent Exchange” is a blog that focuses on topics related to personal growth and self-improvement. It provides articles and resources that aim to help readers lead a more fulfilling life by making positive changes in their thoughts, habits, and behaviors. The blog covers a variety of subjects, including mindfulness, mental health, productivity, relationships, and more. It also provides a supportive community for those seeking inspiration, guidance, and motivation to live their best life.

Wow! 😉

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SECI_model_of_knowledge_dimensions

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-Space_(conceptual_framework)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_stages_of_competence

Kolb’s Learning Cycle

[*10.24, *10.25]

fourfolds, Philosophy

Direction of Fit

November 22, 2022 Martin K. Jones 1 Comment

The notion of “Direction of Fit” can describe several associated concepts, from a specific one in “Speech Act Theory” (SAT) to the more general one in the “Philosophy of Mind” (POM). For SAT, the concept depends on whether words accurately describe the world (word-to-world), or if the world is actually altered by words (world-to-word) (or possibly both or neither). For POM, the concept is generalized to be between mind (or thought) and world, and of course, word could serve to mediate between mind (or thought) and world.

I propose that direction of fit could also be enlarged to encompass the fits of world-to-world and word-to-word.

Perhaps the notion of world fitting to world is tautological, that it is always true by necessity. For any fit of world to world is natural, in as much as we understand it, because anything else would be super-natural. This is the realm of science then, when we try to explain how the mechanism of the world behaves in its ordered operation. I imagine that we could also put engineering and technology in this case, since we are trying to create an artifact in the world that meshes with the normal goings on of nature. If it meshes very poorly, it either breaks or nature does instead.

The notion of word fitting to word is interesting as well. It is not given that words I write will fit with the words that you read, or there is a proper fit between speaking and listening. I guess the art of rhetoric can be placed here, as how we can fashion our words best to convince or explain or engage. In the POM sense, perhaps any art could be included as well, from literature to music to visual arts, since they strive to convey thoughts to thoughts. I am reminded of the notion of the perfect language in accurately describing the world or of complete understanding between minds.

Maybe words describing world could also be science, but perhaps its proper realm should be more of history or the states of human affairs. This is more in agreement with the opposite direction of World-to-Word, or world fitting to word.

Maybe I’m just thinking of a certain fourfold of Richard McKeon, and want to make a correspondence of

Word-to-World => Thought
World-to-Word => Action
Word-to-Word => Word
World-to-World => Thing

although I’m not sure this works.

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direction_of_fit

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/speech-acts/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangle_of_reference

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Message_in_the_Bottle#%22The_Delta_Factor%22

https://read.dukeupress.edu/the-philosophical-review/article-abstract/123/4/429/87552/On-the-Very-Idea-of-Direction-of-Fit?redirectedFrom=fulltext

https://www.jstor.org/stable/44290001

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/belief/

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/intention/

http://www.gavinjensen.com/blog/category/Philosophy+of+Language

Things, Thoughts, Words, and Actions

[*12.96, *12.98]

Philosophy, religion

The Four Paths of Yoga

September 24, 2022 Martin K. Jones 1 Comment

According to the Vedanta, the 4 major margas (paths) are Jnana Yoga (the path of wisdom and knowledge), Bhakti Yoga (the path of devotion), Karma Yoga (path of selfless action or service) and Raja Yoga (path of self-discipline):

Jnana Yoga: The path of wisdom and knowledge
Bhakti Yoga: The path of devotion
Karma Yoga: The path of selfless action and service
Raja Yoga: The path of self-discipline

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Yogas

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jnana_yoga

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma_yoga

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhakti_yoga

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C4%81ja_yoga

https://artsandculture.google.com/story/the-four-paths-of-yoga/QQURiPuOVM2eIw#

https://chopra.com/articles/the-4-paths-of-yoga

fourfolds, Philosophy

The Three Pillars of Stoicism

May 16, 2022 Martin K. Jones Leave a comment

The Four Cardinal Virtues of Wisdom, Justice, Temperance, and Courage are often linked to the “Three Pillars” of Stoicism: Logics, Ethics, and Physics. Logics and rational thought enables the virtue of (practical) wisdom to produce intelligent assent or rejection. Ethics and moral strivings condition the virtue of justice (and courage) to inform proper action or non-action. Physics and natural constraints temper the virtue of courage (and temperance) by proportionate or bounded desire or aversion.

- Logics (Rational Domain): Assent for (practical) Wisdom
- Physics (Natural Domain): Desire for Courage and Temperance (restraint)
- Ethics (Moral Domain): Action for Justice

Note the mismatch between Four Cardinal Virtues and the Three Pillars. Some add Metaphysics to get Four Pillars, although what domain does it inform? (Supernatural? Speculative? Philosophical?) Also note my use of the term “Logics”. If the British can use the term “Maths” then I can certainly use “Logics,” because logic can now come in many different formulations.

Further Reading:

The Highest Good: An Introduction To The 4 Stoic Virtues

Disciplines, Fields, and Virtues: The Full Stoic System in One Neat Package

Stoicism

The Spheres of Human Understanding

The Four Cardinal Virtues

Images of Logics, Ethics, Physics:

https://www.google.com/search?q=logics+physics+ethics&tbm=isch

fourfolds, Philosophy

The Passions of the Stoics

January 3, 2022 Martin K. Jones 4 Comments

I will show you fear in a handful of dust.

— From “The Waste Land”, by T. S. Eliot

The Stoics divided the passions into four parts, consisting of a two by two matrix of “good” or “bad” emotions versus whether they occur during the present or while thinking about the future.

Delight (or Pleasure): present and good
Distress: present and bad
Desire (or Appetite) : future and good
Dread (or Fear): future and bad

To Stoics all these passions were actually harmful, in the sense that they are irrational and instead should be thoughtfully managed. Instead one should have Three Good Feelings and but not Three Not-as-Good Feelings:

Joy (chara) instead of Pleasure
Wish (or Hope) (boulesis) instead of Appetite
Care (eulabeia) instead of Fear

What about Distress and its Stoic version (which might even be Calm or Ease)? And what of emotions for past memories? They might be Relief (past and “bad”) and Regret (past and “good”).

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoic_passions

http://people.wku.edu/jan.garrett/stoipass.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Passions

https://immoderatestoic.com/blog/2013/4/2/stoic-emotionsall-three-of-them

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passions_(philosophy)

Stoic Ethics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passion:_An_Essay_on_Personality

[*12.174]

fourfolds, Philosophy, Physics, Science

On the Death of a Giant

August 1, 2021 Martin K. Jones Leave a comment

Renowned physicist Steven Weinberg passed away recently. He was a giant in the world of physics and winner of the Nobel prize, advancing knowledge about the Standard Model and the unification of physical forces. He was also, famously, a materialist and atheist.

In his book “The Sophist”, Plato wrote (metaphorically?) about the battle of the gods and the giants. He related how the gods were friends of Platonic forms (perhaps being close to forms themselves) whereas the giants were materialists. Plato, being partial to forms, painted the giants as militant and unreasonable materialists, and the gods as a friendly and peaceful sort.

The Greek gods were friendly and peaceful? Perhaps the giants of the legend were the easy-going and reasonable sort, since the gods of the Greeks seemed the opposite. They say that history is rewritten by the victors.

Further Reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Weinberg

With Steven Weinberg’s death, physics loses a titan

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/learning-to-live-in-steven-weinbergs-pointless-universe/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/steven-weinberg-nobel-winning-physicist-who-united-principal-forces-of-nature-dies-at-88/2021/07/26/75d8d24a-ee31-11eb-bf80-e3877d9c5f06_story.html

A very nice article:

https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=5566

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0172%3Atext%3DSoph.%3Apage%3D246

eightfolds, fourfolds, logic, Philosophy

John Buridan’s Octagon of Opposition

July 8, 2021 Martin K. Jones Leave a comment

Medieval logician John (or Jean) Buridan was a scholar of Aristotle, and wrote many works of commentary and elaboration on Aristotelian philosophy. Several items in logic and philosophy are tied to Buridan (such as Buridan’s Bridge and Buridan’s Ass) but he may now be more widely known for his Octagon which combines Aristotle’s Square of Opposition with a Square of Modality.

Below and to the right is a fourfold diagram of Aristotle’s Square of Opposition. The modern universal and existential (or particular) qualifiers are ∀ (meaning All) and ∃ (meaning Some), respectively. Also in these diagrams, ¬ means logical Not.